Kwetsbaarheden worden geladen…
Kwetsbaarheden worden geladen…
CVE-2026-52946
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/fcntl: fix SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order in fasync signaling A SOFTIRQ-safe to SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order deadlock can occur in send_sigio() and send_sigurg() when a process group receives a signal. When FASYNC is configured for a process group (PIDTYPE_PGID), both functions use read_lock(&tasklist_lock) to traverse the task list. However, they are frequently called from softirq context: - send_sigio() via input_inject_event -> kill_fasync - send_sigurg() via tcp_check_urg -> sk_send_sigurg (NET_RX_SOFTIRQ) The deadlock is caused by the rwlock writer fairness mechanism: 1. CPU 0 (process context) holds read_lock(&tasklist_lock) in do_wait(). 2. CPU 1 (process context) attempts write_lock(&tasklist_lock) in fork() or exit() and spins, which blocks all new readers. 3. CPU 0 is interrupted by a softirq (e.g., TCP URG packet reception). 4. The softirq calls send_sigurg() and attempts to acquire read_lock(&tasklist_lock), deadlocking because CPU 1 is waiting. Since PID hashing and do_each_pid_task() traversals are already RCU-protected, the read_lock on tasklist_lock is no longer strictly required for safe traversal. Fix this by replacing tasklist_lock with rcu_read_lock(), aligning the process group signaling path with the single-PID path. This also mitigates a potential remote denial of service vector via TCP URG packets. Lockdep splat: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected [...] Chain exists of: &dev->event_lock --> &f_owner->lock --> tasklist_lock Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(tasklist_lock); local_irq_disable(); lock(&dev->event_lock); lock(&f_owner->lock); <Interrupt> lock(&dev->event_lock); *** DEADLOCK ***
Dit record: live koppeling— laatst opgehaald: 24 september 2026 om 04:14.
Rechtstreeks overgenomen uit NVD, CISA of de leverancier — soms Engelstalig, ongewijzigd t.o.v. de bron.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/fcntl: fix SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order in fasync signaling A SOFTIRQ-safe to SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order deadlock can occur in send_sigio() and send_sigurg() when a process group receives a signal. When FASYNC is configured for a process group (PIDTYPE_PGID), both functions use read_lock(&tasklist_lock) to traverse the task list. However, they are frequently called from softirq context: - send_sigio() via input_inject_event -> kill_fasync - send_sigurg() via tcp_check_urg -> sk_send_sigurg (NET_RX_SOFTIRQ) The deadlock is caused by the rwlock writer fairness mechanism: 1. CPU 0 (process context) holds read_lock(&tasklist_lock) in do_wait(). 2. CPU 1 (process context) attempts write_lock(&tasklist_lock) in fork() or exit() and spins, which blocks all new readers. 3. CPU 0 is interrupted by a softirq (e.g., TCP URG packet reception). 4. The softirq calls send_sigurg() and attempts to acquire read_lock(&tasklist_lock), deadlocking because CPU 1 is waiting. Since PID hashing and do_each_pid_task() traversals are already RCU-protected, the read_lock on tasklist_lock is no longer strictly required for safe traversal. Fix this by replacing tasklist_lock with rcu_read_lock(), aligning the process group signaling path with the single-PID path. This also mitigates a potential remote denial of service vector via TCP URG packets. Lockdep splat: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected [...] Chain exists of: &dev->event_lock --> &f_owner->lock --> tasklist_lock Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(tasklist_lock); local_irq_disable(); lock(&dev->event_lock); lock(&f_owner->lock); <Interrupt> lock(&dev->event_lock); *** DEADLOCK ***
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Attack vector
NETWORK
Privileges required
NONE
User interaction
NONE
Vertrouwelijkheid
Geen
Integriteit
Geen
Beschikbaarheid
Hoog
Kans op misbruik binnen 30 dagen
0.5%
Percentiel
40e
Bron: FIRST.org, bijgewerkt op 23 september 2026.
Limit access to the interactive shell of the additional GNU/Linux subssytem to trusted personnel only.
Onze eigen Nederlandstalige interpretatie en context bij de brondata hierboven.
IACS Radar-duiding
Onze eigen interpretatie en context bij deze kwetsbaarheid — geen officiële bron.
IACS Radar-prioriteringsscore
Gebaseerd op CVSS 7.5, EPSS 0.5%, industriële relevantie 55/100.
Weegt CVSS, EPSS, KEV-status, industriële relevantie en exposure-relevantie samen — een aanvulling op, geen vervanging van, de losse scores hieronder en hierboven.
Voorwaarden voor misbruik
Operationele impact & energierelevantie
Mogelijk verlies van zicht op of besturing over het proces bij succesvol misbruik.
Beoordeeld als relevant voor de energiesector op basis van: Vermeld in een officiële CISA ICS Advisory, wat directe relevantie voor industriële besturingssystemen bevestigt. Leverancier "Siemens" is een bekende leverancier van apparatuur voor de energiesector.
Aanbevolen defensieve maatregelen
Industriële relevantiescore
Classificatie is voorlopig; handmatige verificatie door een OT-securityanalist wordt aanbevolen.
Geclassificeerd door IACS Radar-analysepijplijn (geautomatiseerd) op 24 september 2026.
IEC 62443-mapping
Automatische IACS Radar-duiding op basis van de gerapporteerde CWE-zwakteclassificatie; geen officiële certificeringsuitspraak.